Leave a comment

tpau November 6 2008, 19:07:46 UTC
hmm.. this is an interesting discussion, and probably mostly correct. obviously, i cannot speak too much on race in America being as white as you can get.

my experiences are i think formed too differently to be useful here. there were no black people in Russia (ok i saw this one guy once in my 11 years in the entire city of Moscow) so race was a very different thing. russians looked slavic. but jews looked germanic. and georgeans looked slightly asian. and those from kazahstan looked very asian. and so on. we had our own little ethnic version over there. there was certainly all sorts of "stupid georgian" jokes and you could gt dolls in russian national costume with blond braids, or in uzbek costume, with dozens of black braids.

did everyone love eachother and accept eachother? no. russians got better jobs in russia, usbeks got better jobs in uzbekistan, but no one wanted to live in uzbekistan, so you see how that went.

anyway that aside... my main experience that forms the statements i made in andrew's journal come from gender rather then race. i think it might still apply, not sure, so i will write it out and you can tell me i guess.

when iwas growingup in Moscow, i experienced fairly good gender equality. women work, serve in active dury army, in russia. more women are engineers then men, more men are teachers, etc. grandma was an engineer, her mom a doctor. growing up it never occured to me (or any of the girls i knew) that we might not go to college, or that we couldnt' be doctos/engineers/scientists/whatever because we were girls. in 7th grade, i came to Brooklyn NY. to our class there came a woman ,she was a physicist. she spoke passionatly how these days girls TOO can be scientists. it was all very passionate and cheery and inspirational.
because she and the school made that special effort to talk about it, discuss it, i thought "wait. she makes it sounds special and unique that a woman ca be a scientist. maybe you need to be some sort of super special sort of woman to do that, andi am jsut normal. maybe i can't be a scientist after all."
that was the first time it ever entered my head that i may not be anythign i wanted to be because i was a girl. it had never occured to me before.

the conclusion i draw form that is that it is due to her makign it special/unique/out of the ordinary that caused that thought.

now yes, thigns are not at the popint of normality/equality currently, if they were, then what i say would be mroe ture i guess. but i think that for as long as we make it a special/unique thing when a gay couple marries or a woman is an astronaut or a black man is a president, as lognas we make that NOT seem liek an everyday occurance, our kids will think that it IS unique and not everyday...

Reply

shadowravyn November 6 2008, 19:17:57 UTC
the conclusion i draw form that is that it is due to her makign it special/unique/out of the ordinary that caused that thought.

You came in with a different mindset than most of the girls she was talking to. They needed to be told that it was possible for them--their grandmothers likely weren't engineers, or their mothers doctors. From a young age, girls are shown that their roles are that of teachers, wives, mothers, librarians. Boys get to be astronauts and astrophysicists, the doctors and the lawyers.

So, a teacher comes in to tell you what you already knew, and so you assumed she meant something else--that a woman had to be extra-special to be a doctor. What those other little girls heard was that you don't.
as lognas we make that NOT seem liek an everyday occurance, our kids will think that it IS unique and not everyday...

There's a difference between discussing it and becoming smug. Right now, our society is still fraught with a million, million inequalities, and only by showing that they can be shattered will they stay shattered. Once it no longer becomes noteworthy, THEN it will be true progress. But we're not there, yet.

Reply

tpau November 6 2008, 19:45:22 UTC
i hear you. i am worried i guess that we will not knwo the line. or rather we will not do it right. i think that actions change though, not thought changing actions. it is easier to change how people act then how they think. so i guess my worry is that while we try to change how peopel think/talk about race, we are not changing how they act i.e. what they say.

hmm, otoh i am havign difficulty actually expressing waht i mean. hm. i think what i mean is that to me if we stop tratignit liek a special ofccurance, it will becoem an everyday thing. as opposed to treating it liek a special occurance until it becomes an everyday thing. iam worried that this way it will never become that everyday thing...

Reply

ddrpolaris November 6 2008, 19:58:54 UTC
There is a problem with things like this not being brought up on the occasions where they occur. If they are not, they only have the daily experiences that are foisted upon them. A feminist example: Hillary or (shudder) Sarah Palin are not used as examples to girls of what they can accomplish. Little girls are left without specific examples what they can perceive on their own. The paragons they are left with instead are the likes of celebrities like Hilton or Hanah Montana. In toy stores their toys are genderized, the toys promoting scientific exploration relegate to "boys" sections, toys related to homemaking relegated to the "girls" section.
It would be great if we did not need to demonstrate to children with examples that they can accomplish anything, but the problem is that if they were not highlighted these possibilities would be invisible.

Reply

tpau November 6 2008, 20:06:55 UTC
hmm... valid point, astronaut-Barbie not withstanding... thought that implies that we are better served fixing the toy stores, no?

Reply

ddrpolaris November 6 2008, 20:22:58 UTC
astronaut barbie is a great example of how that type of top down approach to fixing things doesn't work. Toy makers have made politically correct toys like those in the past and they do not sell. They do not sell because children want to buy things that are held up for them as ideals. If the only positive role-models girls are allowed to see idolized as paragons for their gender are models and actresses, they'll buy dolls of models and actresses. By showing a wider range of ideals for them to strive for, women that can be Presidents or Scientists that are held in the same high regard, they will see these things as possibilities for them to strive for.

On the other side of things and getting back to the racial issue, I've heard the children of racist parents use as an argument "If blacks are just as smart as the rest of us, how come one's managed to become President after so many years of them being able to vote?"
Being able to take away counterexamples like this is a HUGE step.

Reply

tpau November 6 2008, 20:29:33 UTC
girls don't buy dolls, their parents do. but that is really really off-topic...

i am not sure beign able to take away that counter example will actually help though...

Reply

ddrpolaris November 6 2008, 20:50:48 UTC
Parents buy children what they want (or in many cases, children get gift cards from relatives and buy what they want).
And if we want old memes to die the deaths they deserve, leaving the job solely to the parents is not the way to go.

Reply

gunthersdncemix November 8 2008, 04:27:10 UTC
That's what Cool Aunts are for.... MUHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Reply

shadowravyn November 6 2008, 20:02:32 UTC
If acts change, but thoughts do not, then we're only pretending and it isn't going to last.

Besides, it's not going to be a huge celebration every time. As it becomes more commonplace, the celebrations will be less. Besides, the first people to shatter some new glass ceiling deserve a big celebration, because their position as a front runner SUCKS. ~_^

Reply

tpau November 6 2008, 20:05:54 UTC
my theory is that thoughts DO change after actions as we internalize what we do... but that is a fundamental difference of world-view i am willing to concede may be "just me"

Reply

arachne8x November 6 2008, 20:09:27 UTC
Yeah, I echo shadowravyn's words here. It won't always be a celebration, but the first time it needs to be, so that we understand the boundaries and barriers we are breaking through.

I'd like to add: Ignoring these important moments, under the guise of making the act seem common place, feels similar to denying that it ever was a struggle.

Reply

shogunhb November 7 2008, 01:15:36 UTC
So... if we ignore it, it will go away? I can think of a bunch of counterexamples:

Drugs
Racism
Rape
Unsafe Sex

Reply

tpau November 7 2008, 01:23:42 UTC
there is a difference between not talking at all and talking differently.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up